Date   

Re: Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

 

Just to clarify. The new keypad software is not available for the GTOCP4. I apologize that I did not realize that this was a potential issue using P02-08 with the GTOCP4 and will have to update my documentation since this is a consideration for current users of keypad version 4.19.3.

 

Clear Skies,

 

Marj Christen

Astro-Physics, Inc

11250 Forest Hills Rd

Machesney Park, IL 61115

Phone: 815-282-1513

Fax: 815-282-9847

www.astro-physics.com

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Roland Christen via groups.io
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 12:32 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

 

If you updated the CP4 to the latest version 02-08, we added an intermediate 200x button rate which changed the other rates. So you will need to load the new version of the keypad software into your keypad.

 

Roland

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Steffens via groups.io <gwsteffens@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2020 12:16 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

That's what I did. I set the button rate to 1200 but it slews slower that 1200 when using the buttons. I didn't confirm it but it probably slews at 600. :(

Gary


--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Bill Long
 

Their OAG (QHY OAG-M) bolts directly to their CFW3 series wheel. Small prism on it (8mm x 8mm) but good enough for a Lodestar x2 chip.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 10:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
That does not sound good.
The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>; main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2020 11:43 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site

On my ASI6200 it was so severe that I had one triad of the Gerd Neumann CTU maxed out and still didn't have enough to fix that portion of the chip. In my book that is way too much tilt and looks more like sloppy QC (more likely complete lack of QC) on the manufacturers behalf.

I'm eyeballing that Apx60 from Atik. They have a process they follow to get their chips flat when they build their cameras. I suspect QHY does something similar as those have less users experiencing terrible tilt. 

All 5 cameras I've owned from ZWO have had massive tilt problems. Buyer beware.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 6:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Bill Long
 

7 position 50mm wheel? 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Brian Valente <bvalente@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 10:07 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
>>>The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Starlight xpress has some excellent filter wheel + built-in OAG

earlier this year they released a 7 position "mid" version, which i find quite good



On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:05 AM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
That does not sound good.
The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>; main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2020 11:43 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site

On my ASI6200 it was so severe that I had one triad of the Gerd Neumann CTU maxed out and still didn't have enough to fix that portion of the chip. In my book that is way too much tilt and looks more like sloppy QC (more likely complete lack of QC) on the manufacturers behalf.

I'm eyeballing that Apx60 from Atik. They have a process they follow to get their chips flat when they build their cameras. I suspect QHY does something similar as those have less users experiencing terrible tilt. 

All 5 cameras I've owned from ZWO have had massive tilt problems. Buyer beware.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 6:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

Roland Christen
 

If you updated the CP4 to the latest version 02-08, we added an intermediate 200x button rate which changed the other rates. So you will need to load the new version of the keypad software into your keypad.

Roland



-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Steffens via groups.io <gwsteffens@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2020 12:16 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

That's what I did. I set the button rate to 1200 but it slews slower that 1200 when using the buttons. I didn't confirm it but it probably slews at 600. :(

Gary

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

Gary Steffens
 

That's what I did. I set the button rate to 1200 but it slews slower that 1200 when using the buttons. I didn't confirm it but it probably slews at 600. :(

Gary


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

 

>>>The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Starlight xpress has some excellent filter wheel + built-in OAG

earlier this year they released a 7 position "mid" version, which i find quite good



On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:05 AM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
That does not sound good.
The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>; main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2020 11:43 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site

On my ASI6200 it was so severe that I had one triad of the Gerd Neumann CTU maxed out and still didn't have enough to fix that portion of the chip. In my book that is way too much tilt and looks more like sloppy QC (more likely complete lack of QC) on the manufacturers behalf.

I'm eyeballing that Apx60 from Atik. They have a process they follow to get their chips flat when they build their cameras. I suspect QHY does something similar as those have less users experiencing terrible tilt. 

All 5 cameras I've owned from ZWO have had massive tilt problems. Buyer beware.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 6:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Roland Christen
 

That does not sound good.
The main problem i see with the QHY cameras is the lack of a good filter wheel with off-axis guider capability. (unless I'm missing something)

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>; main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Dec 21, 2020 11:43 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site

On my ASI6200 it was so severe that I had one triad of the Gerd Neumann CTU maxed out and still didn't have enough to fix that portion of the chip. In my book that is way too much tilt and looks more like sloppy QC (more likely complete lack of QC) on the manufacturers behalf.

I'm eyeballing that Apx60 from Atik. They have a process they follow to get their chips flat when they build their cameras. I suspect QHY does something similar as those have less users experiencing terrible tilt. 

All 5 cameras I've owned from ZWO have had massive tilt problems. Buyer beware.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 6:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: CDK 14 on a Mach 2? #Mach2GTO

skester@...
 

Xentex, the similarity in weight and length between the 12.5 and 14 was one of the reasons I posted my question. 

I will also admit to some confusion on my part in how the Mach 2 capacity chart indicates how to measure the OTA diameter/height.  The top two drawings seem to indicate the measurement is of the OTA tube only, and does not include the height of the mounting rings or dovetail, while the piggyback setup measures from the bottom of the dovetail to the top of the upper scope.  Which is the correct way to measure for the CDK?


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Bill Long
 

On my ASI6200 it was so severe that I had one triad of the Gerd Neumann CTU maxed out and still didn't have enough to fix that portion of the chip. In my book that is way too much tilt and looks more like sloppy QC (more likely complete lack of QC) on the manufacturers behalf.

I'm eyeballing that Apx60 from Atik. They have a process they follow to get their chips flat when they build their cameras. I suspect QHY does something similar as those have less users experiencing terrible tilt. 

All 5 cameras I've owned from ZWO have had massive tilt problems. Buyer beware.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 6:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] M42 from my future observatory site
 
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri


Re: Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

Roland Christen
 

You can set the button rate by pressing button #6 and cycling thru the various rates from .25x to 1200x. You can also set the button rate by pressing +- button and using the < and > buttons to access the various rates.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Steffens via groups.io <gwsteffens@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Sun, Dec 20, 2020 11:50 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

Hi Roland, thanks for your reply. I apologize for not being more specific. I'm referring to the "Button rate". I set it to 1200 but when I push any of the keypad buttons, the slew speed is slow. If I use the keypad to slew to an object (Moon, Mars, etc), it does slew at 1200. So it's only when I use the keypad N, S, E, or W buttons that the slew speed isn't 1200.

Thanks, Gary

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Need to reload keypad image ("Object below horizon" error)

steve.winston@...
 

Thanks Konstantin - will give that a try!


Re: Need to reload keypad image ("Object below horizon" error)

Konstantin von Poschinger
 

Take this:

https://www.astro-physics.info/index.htm?tech_support/mounts/keypad_update/419/419

Grüsse

Konstantin v. Poschinger


Hammerichstr. 5
22605 Hamburg
040/8805747
0171/1983476

Am 21.12.2020 um 16:32 schrieb steve.winston@...:

Hi.

It looks like I need to reload the image in my Mach-1 keypad - I'm getting the "Object Below Horizon" error message, but only for non-stellar / non-solar system objects.

I did a search but could only find this old non-working link to instructions: https://www.astro-physics.com/tech_support/mounts/keypad_update/dataload201/dataload201.htm

Are current instructions available on the website somewhere?

thanks!

Steve
  


Need to reload keypad image ("Object below horizon" error)

steve.winston@...
 

Hi.

It looks like I need to reload the image in my Mach-1 keypad - I'm getting the "Object Below Horizon" error message, but only for non-stellar / non-solar system objects.

I did a search but could only find this old non-working link to instructions: https://www.astro-physics.com/tech_support/mounts/keypad_update/dataload201/dataload201.htm

Are current instructions available on the website somewhere?

thanks!

Steve
  


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Terri Zittritsch
 

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM, Bill Long wrote:
Significant tilt. The QHY600 may be better. Less users reporting issues with those.
Were you not able to adjust it out?   Can you say what significant is?


Terri


Re: CDK 14 on a Mach 2? #Mach2GTO

Terri Zittritsch
 

So I'll provide a counterpoint here, but I would still listen to Roland's feedback.

I was thinking exactly the same thing as you, and that is, if it fits within the green zone of use conditions then it should be fair game.    I guess when looking at lesser built mounts that are built for a price rather than performance point, I'd be skeptical and maybe apply judgement to their specifications, but this is Astro-Physics, and I'd expect that if they spec and sell the mount to meet a performance window, than we can all take that to the bank so to speak.    Now maybe what we're seeing is that because of all of the experience here, these users know that you're not actually going to achieve a green-zone build with that scope and therefore will ultimately fall outside of the specification box, then it's good and helpful feedback.    Otherwise I'd like to know that I can use the mach2 within the specification window advertised.  That was a factor for purchasing the mount in the first place and I'd like not to be accused of under mounting a scope that fits in the A-P spec window.    I have the mach2, and the biggest scope I've used on it is an 11" edge and it works well.     


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

Robert Chozick
 

Thanks Ernie.  I appreciate your comments. 

Robert 


On Dec 20, 2020, at 9:46 PM, ernie.mastroianni@... wrote:

Great shot. Super sharp, excellent processing.


Re: Version P02-08 now available for GTOCP4 and GTOCP5 control boxes

Gary Steffens
 

Hi Roland, thanks for your reply. I apologize for not being more specific. I'm referring to the "Button rate". I set it to 1200 but when I push any of the keypad buttons, the slew speed is slow. If I use the keypad to slew to an object (Moon, Mars, etc), it does slew at 1200. So it's only when I use the keypad N, S, E, or W buttons that the slew speed isn't 1200.

Thanks, Gary


Re: M42 from my future observatory site

ernie.mastroianni@...
 

Great shot. Super sharp, excellent processing.


#Mach2GTO #fieldsetup #mach2gto #Mach2GTO

ernie.mastroianni@...
 

Earlier this evening (Dec. 20) the Mach2 at a lakefront Milwaukee parking lot, set up to shoot the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction. Then clouds.
The good news: daytime field alignment worked.

I leveled the mount, slewed to Home position, then used an iPhone compass app to get a rough direction to the pole. Using the keypad, I slewed to the Moon. With just a little azimuth adjustment and a recal on the moon's center, I spotted Jupiter through a low power eyepiece after a meridian flip.
This was just minutes after sunset.

Unfortunately, I had only 10 or 15 seconds of viewing until the clouds rolled in. I'll try again in 2080. Or maybe Tuesday night.
Bottom line, mount and keypad work great.
Ernie


Re: CDK 14 on a Mach 2? #Mach2GTO

Wayne Hixson
 

I had a 12.5” AGO iDK on my Mach 2 for a few months and it handled it well. 


On Dec 20, 2020, at 4:51 PM, Xentex <michael@...> wrote:

I think it's reasonable to ask the same question regarding the CDK 12.5.  It weighs the same as the CDK 14 and comes in at 17.26" diameter (vs 18.95 for the 14") and 35" length before adding the imaging train (vs 35.7" for the 14").  Not a huge difference between them.

I've asked myself this exact same question about maybe someday putting a CDK on the Mach 2.

7401 - 7420 of 82372